AcidiclyBasicGlitch

joined 7 months ago
 

Silicon Valley oligarchs like Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen have much to gain from Donald Trump’s seizure of Greenland, both as a source of rare earth minerals to feed the AI boom and as a site for a libertarian “crypto state.”

In 2019, Trump’s ambassador to Denmark and Greenland visited a major rare-earth mining project on the island shortly before Trump’s first calls to buy the country. Opposition to the mine ushered liberal political party Inuit Ataqatigiit into power two years later, which halted the mine and banned all future oil development.

The president’s renewed intention to take over Greenland has reignited debates over its sovereignty, as the country grapples with the trade-offs between economic opportunity and independence from Denmark. As the country’s glaciers recede, it’s also facing sweeping climate-driven transformations, threatening traditional industries like fishing and hunting and exposing valuable mineral resources.

Just two weeks before some of its investors were glad-handing at the Capitol celebrations, KoBold Metals raised $537 million in its latest funding round, bringing its valuation to almost $3 billion. Among the contributors was a leading venture capital firm founded by Marc Andreessen, an early Silicon Valley entrepreneur who has helped shape the administration’s technology policies, including consulting with Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency as a self-proclaimed “unpaid intern.”

“We believe in adventure,” Andreessen wrote in a lengthy 2023 manifesto that outlined his criticisms of centralized government, advocating for technologists to take control, “rebelling against the status quo, mapping uncharted territory, conquering dragons, and bringing home the spoils for our community.” Connie Chan, a general partner at his venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, is listed as a KoBold director in its 2022 Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

In addition to KoBold, Andreessen has also backed other ventures eyeing the arctic nation: he is a significant investor in Praxis Nation, a project aiming to use Greenland to establish a “crypto state,” a self-governing, experimental community built around libertarian ideals and technology like cryptocurrency.

Greenland, however, does not allow private property, an arrangement that historically has given communities a stronger voice in determining how or if its natural resources are developed — and could prove a problem for Brown’s planned utopia. But perhaps that could change under a new government.

“This Is About Critical Minerals” Greenland is warming at a much faster rate than the rest of the planet, causing its glaciers to precipitously retreat. As the ice recedes, these valuable deposits are becoming more accessible. A 2023 European Commission survey revealed that Greenland has twenty-five out of thirty-four minerals classified as critical raw materials, or resources that are essential to the green energy transition but have a high risk of disrupted supply chains. The country boasts some of the world’s largest deposits of nickel and cobalt, and collectively, its mineral reserves almost equal those of the United States.

This wealth of resources has drawn the attention of companies like KoBold Metals, whose Silicon Valley backers have a vested interest in supplying materials for the tech industry.

KoBold has positioned itself as providing critical solutions for climate change, facilitating a global reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by supplying the materials needed for batteries and other renewable technologies. The company hailed President Joe Biden’s use of the Defense Production Act to encourage mining in 2022, along with the Inflation Reduction Act’s measures to subsidize international mining for rare earth minerals.

In Greenland, KoBold Metals’ exploration licenses focus on searching for nickel, copper, cobalt, and platinum-group minerals — materials important for green energy, but also for data centers’ rapid growth.

 

President Trump’s power over the Federal Reserve will be front and center at the Supreme Court next week.

The justices on Wednesday will hear arguments on whether Trump can fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook over accusations of mortgage fraud.

Looming over it all is the Justice Department’s criminal investigation into Jerome Powell, the Fed’s chair, which came into public view last weekend.

In his second term, Trump has looked to reshape independent agencies that have long enjoyed protections that prevent the president from firing those who lead them on a whim.

Trump argues it infringes on his constitutional authority to oversee the executive branch, part of an expansive view of presidential power known as the unitary executive theory.

“Once Trump controls a majority of the Fed, he can use the Fed’s vast powers to enrich himself personally – to reward his billionaire friends and to punish his enemies,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a critic of Powell’s who has defended him against Trump’s firing threats, told reporters. “That has been his strategy across the government.”

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 prevents the president from firing the central bank’s governors except “for cause.” The law does not, however, explicitly define what “cause” means.

 

Article without paywall https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-doj-files-bonkers-motion-164621097.html

On Friday, Trump’s Department of Justice quietly filed a motion to block Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie’s request for an independent monitor to oversee the release of Epstein Files in the closed case against Ghislaine Maxwell.

In a new motion, the DOJ urged Judge Paul A. Engelmayer to reject the request, stating that the court had no authority to approve it because neither Khanna nor Massie were involved in the criminal case against Maxwell that landed her behind bars.

 

This legitimately isn't meant to be a gotcha question or an attack on any political ideology. I just want to get a better understanding of why class consciousness is only applicable to the left, and the concept of populism (while it does seem to be increasingly applied to both sides of the political spectrum in certain cases) seems to be reserved as a term used for the right.

Regardless of historical ties (like class consciousness originating from Marxism) from my understanding (which admittedly is very basic for both concepts), populism doesn't have to necessarily focus on class issues or class solidarity. However, when you look at the way somebody like Trump uses populism to target a voting base, it very clearly is doing this by promising the working class a way to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps." Or, by attacking the "educated elites" on the left (who he, and many on the right, also accuse of being "cultural Marxists").

My very basic understanding of class consciousness, is the awareness individuals have regarding their place within a hierarchy of social classes and their common shared interests.

Again, I understand that populism doesn't have to be used this way, but in Trump's case, regardless of why and how a billionaire would need to define the "elite" to reach his voter base, Trump's form of populism very much seems to rely on defining a class, and an "us vs them," strategy that he promises will allow members of the working class to achieve a common interest.